Lawmaker: court ruling shows need to reform Michigan forfeiture law

A state lawmaker from Macomb County believes an appeals court decision will help his effort to reform the law that allows police to keep property seized from criminal suspects.

The state Court of Appeals’ ruling last Tuesday invalidated part of the civil forfeiture law that requires an indigent person to post a bond in order to retain a right to the property after it has been seized in a case out of Kent County.

State Rep. Peter Lucido, R-Shelby Township, said Saturday he hopes the ruling will help convince his colleagues to pass a bill that nixes the requirement for any bond when law enforcement seizes property suspected to be in connection with criminal activity, as part of an investigation. Lucido said it’s unfair for someone to have to post 10 percent of the value of the property within 20 days of the seizure or the property is lost. Property sometimes includes cash.

“You can lose your property before there is even a criminal charge,” Lucido said. “This is wrong. It’s un-American, it’s unconstitutional.”

Advertisement

He noted additionally that police officers –- who are not expert appraisers –- are tasked with setting the estimated value of the property.

Lucido expects his bill to pass within weeks. He said it already gained enough support to pass the House of Representatives and was approved by a state Senate committee.

Lucido, a lawyer, said he has questioned the practice by police and prosecutors for years and began efforts to curb it after he took office nearly two years ago. He gained passage of a bill signed last October by Gov. Rick Snyder that requires police to keep the property based on “clear and convincing” evidence, which he said is 75 percent, instead of “preponderance” of the evidence, which only requires more than 50 percent proof.

He eventually would like to require a criminal conviction for property forfeiture.

Police forfeited about $244 million in property from 2001 to 2013, an average of nearly $19 million a year, according to the Institute of Justice.

“Nobody should profit from criminal activity but the reality is that police departments are seizing property without any criminal charges being brought,” he said. “Police are using the money to fund operations.”

In the Kent County case, the three-judge panel said Shantrese Kinnon should not have been required to post a $2,000 bond to claim $20,000 worth of property – two vehicles, a motorcycle, cash and two computers -- within 20 days of its seizure. Kinnon was only able to post $1,100 so had to select which items for which she could post.

The panel of judges Christopher Murray, David Sawyer and Patrick Meter say in the opinion civil forfeiture law violated the due process clause designed to protect everyone.

About the Author

My beat is the courts of Macomb County and general assignment.
Read more of Jameson Cook's court coverage on his blog http://courthousedish.blogspot.com/ Reach the author at jamie.cook@macombdaily.com
or follow Jameson on Twitter: @jamesoncook.